Robert Meyer wrote:

> The 2.7 L sludge issue may be a non-issue. FWIW, the reported failure rate
> is something like 650 complaints out of a possible 750,000 engines. See the
> ongoing discussion on allpar.com:
>
> http://www.allpar.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=59368
>
> I'm going to change my oil and not worry about it!
>
> SpongeBob

You just made a sh**load of assumptions there as to it being a
non-issue. Are you assuming that 100% of owners of failed engines filed
a formal complaint? That would not be a wise assumption. What if only
1 out of 50 owners of failed engines complained? That would represent
almost a 5% failure rate.

You would have to look at percent of owners of other engines (known not
to have a design problem that would lead to failure) who filed
complaints (that wouldn't be scientific either, but a better inidcator
than just looking at raw percent of compliants). IOW, if engine X
(known to have no design problems) had a failure complaint rate of
0.87%, comparing that to the failure complaint rate indicates that the
2.7L is of similar good design. HOWEVER, if the engine of known good
design has a failure complaint rate of only 0.02%, then it could be a
reasonable conclusion that the 2.7L has a problem. As it is, you don't
have enough data to go on.

Not saying that the alleged 2.7L problems are real or imagined, but I
certainly am not prepared to lean towards there not being a problem
based on "only" 650 complaints out of 750k owners. And I say that as an
owner of a 2.7L with 140+kmiles on it that runs as good as the day it
left the factory.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')